Mexico Trucker Online

The House has made it veto-proof clear: The controversial pilot program allowing big Mexican trucks to cross the U.S. border and travel into the country must end.

The Senate has yet to act, though. And Mexico and its U.S. big-business allies are ramping up their efforts to block the repeal, including a renewed warning by Mexican officials to retaliate against U.S. exports if the program is abolished.

So begins an excellent article on the Mexican Cross Border Program from a neutral perspective, in a story published at Politico.com

And the proponents should continue to fight to keep this program which is a legal obligation we have under the terms of the NAFTA agreement that we signed with Canada and Mexico.

The article points out what we’ve been saying all along, that this has nothing to do with truck safety, concern for the safety of other motorists or any of the myriad of excuses that have come from the opposition.

Read the rest of this entry »

The home team trails in the third quarter as the underdog visitors steadily advance the ball. Coaches are nervous; fans are grumbling. Desperate for a turnaround, the home team announces a surprise rule change: From now on, the visitors are banned from crossing the 50-yard line.

Sounds absurd, but that’s what Congress proposes to do with NAFTA, the free-trade accord it approved in 1993. Sure, NAFTA might not be a crowd pleaser. It is, however, a treaty that legally binds the United States. The rules don’t change just because the home team is in trouble.

NAFTA has always included provisions to grant U.S., Mexican and Canadian truckers access to one another’s shipping routes. Bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress, yielding to pressure from the Teamsters, voted last week to halt a year-old pilot program that allowed a few dozen properly inspected, safe Mexican trucks to haul cargo deep within U.S. territory.

Short of using actual facts, the Teamsters and truckers groups have done everything possible to feed the worst stereotypes about the dangers of Mexican trucks on U.S. highways.

It’s harder when facts get in the way:

Read the rest of this entry »

The Mexican Embassy in Washington DC just released a statement concerning the vote on HR-6630 to put an end to the Mexican Cross Border Pilot Program. The statement reflects my earlier opinion about the fallout from the action by the House of Representatives.

The Mexican Embassy said.

“The Government of Mexico is “deeply concerned” about the House vote and welcomes the administration’s intention to veto the measure.

“Mexico has fulfilled its NAFTA obligations and expects the U.S. do the same. Should the bill be enacted into law, the government of Mexico will consider taking all the appropriate actions, including remedies or countermeasures under the North American Free Trade Agreement,”

As well they should and they have every right to do so.

The White House, in a statement earlier in the day warning that senior advisers would recommend a veto, said U.S. and Mexican officials had “effectively addressed” any safety concerns. The White House also said terminating the program would damage trade with Mexico as well as hurt U.S. trucking firms participating in the program.

When Congress reconvenes in September, it may break San Antonio’s economic development heart.

A bill is pending a House vote that aims to end the U.S.-Mexico cross-border trucking pilot program that started a year ago — a program that has its roots in San Antonio.

The U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee voted unanimously July 31 on a resolution that would end the test program on its one-year anniversary on Sept. 6.

If the House and the Senate approve the resolution in one form or another, President Bush is expected to veto it unless it’s included in a larger measure. Still, opponents of cross-border trucking believe they have enough congressional votes to override a veto.

The proposal that led to the pilot project originated in San Antonio for economic reasons. A one-truck, one-driver truck freight system to and from Mexico means San Antonio could be a stopping point for warehousing and distribution services. It hadn’t been considered a stopping point before the test program began because all freight had to change carriers at the border about 150 miles away.

Read the rest of this entry »

It was no surprise when FMCSA Administrator John Hill extended the Mexican Cross Border Program for another two years, thus beating the opposition at their own game.

You see, FMCSA has been calling it a “demonstration program” while the opposition called it a “pilot program” which operates under different requirements, requirements that FMCSA has met.

So John Hill, using the oppositions definition of the program, extends it to 3 years as is permitted for a “pilot program”, and Jimmy Hoffa is furious!

I’m mad as hell about it, but I’m not surprised. - Jimmy Hoffa -

What is Jimmy “mad as hell about? That all the money that has found it’s way into the hip pockets of his politicians hasn’t yielded the intended results? Maybe.

I think Jimmy is further pissed because Mexican law forbids him and his union from organizing in that country. Canada allows it and we don’t hear any objections from him about Canadian trucks.

Read the rest of this entry »

Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff,  responding to a report today in the WASHINGTON POST regarding border and port security, had this to say!

According to a report in today’s Washington Post, two recent Congressional reports claim that our Department lacks a comprehensive strategy to protect the American people from the threat of nuclear and radiological weapons and materials, and that our efforts to guard against biological threats are poorly coordinated and have “unclear benefit.”

While we welcome Congressional oversight and thoughtful, balanced recommendations and even criticism, these reports and comments widely miss the mark. They are based on outdated and incomplete information.

Far from lacking a strategic plan or clear goals, the Department, in cooperation with federal, state, local, and international partners, has developed and is implementing a comprehensive Global Nuclear Detection Architecture to prevent the entry of radiological and nuclear weapons or materials into the United States. This architecture is intelligence-driven, and built around a multi-layered strategy that starts overseas, continues at our borders, and is maintained within the U.S. interior.

Read the rest of this entry »